Have $1,000. What to buy?

vegenigma · 12-08-2010, 06:06 PM

EDIT: Bah, on second thought, I have no interest in arguing.

Last edited by vegenigma; 12-08-2010 at 06:33 PM.

vegenigma · 12-08-2010, 06:09 PM

I think I may have given some of you the wrong idea. While I do want a camera that is capable of capturing slowly-moving subjects in low light, I noticed a problem with the image sharpness of my K-x fairly quickly and then devoted the vast majority of my 1000 or so shots to testing it in decent lighting and with stationary subjects. The sharpness/focus problem I experienced occurred very consistently in even the easiest of shots, with the exception of those with subjects in very close proximity.

paperbag846 · 12-08-2010, 06:37 PM

Originally posted by vegenigma

The sharpness/focus problem I experienced occurred very consistently in even the easiest of shots, with the exception of those with subjects in very close proximity.

Were you shooting those subjects with the lens wide open? The kit lens is not very sharp at it's widest aperture.

vegenigma · 12-08-2010, 06:42 PM

Originally posted by paperbag846

J
Buy a KX body only, and a Tameron 17-50 2.8, or the 28-70 2.8, which is supposed to be a brighter lens. They are good, fast, and only run you about 500, which is a very good deal for a fast lens.

Welcome to the sinkhole that is lens buying... it's addictive!

Thank you! Just to confirm, is this the one you're referencing? Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF] AF016P-700 B&H

vegenigma · 12-08-2010, 06:44 PM

Originally posted by paperbag846

Were you shooting those subjects with the lens wide open? The kit lens is not very sharp at it's widest aperture.

For the most part, yes. I'm beginning to think I just have standards that the K-x w/ kit lens doesn't live up to. With all the reviews I perused, I'm surprised I didn't read much about problems w/ sharpness deficiency at wide aperture.

JeffJS · 12-08-2010, 06:44 PM

Originally posted by vegenigma

Thank you! Just to confirm, is this the one you're referencing? Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF] AF016P-700 B&H

That would be the one..

Heed this..

Quote:

Welcome to the sinkhole that is lens buying... it's addictive!

paperbag846 · 12-08-2010, 07:18 PM

Glad I could help.

Take a look at the 28-70 as well... it is supposed to be a little better for low light situations, but it's not nearly as wide. It would be better for portraits though. Depends on what you want... really wide angles, or better portraits?

paperbag846 · 12-08-2010, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by vegenigma

With all the reviews I perused, I'm surprised I didn't read much about problems w/ sharpness deficiency at wide aperture.

Well any lens is going to be it's softest wide open. With a 2.8 lens though, you can shoot at f4 and get a much sharper image than the kit at an equivalent aperture.

I think most lens reviews are very realistic about the kit lens. It's not great... but it's great for $100.

dexmus · 12-08-2010, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by vegenigma

For the most part, yes. I'm beginning to think I just have standards that the K-x w/ kit lens doesn't live up to. With all the reviews I perused, I'm surprised I didn't read much about problems w/ sharpness deficiency at wide aperture.

Couple of things here -
1. Kit lenses are usually not good. Some people say that they are good value for money. But, personally, I never use the kit lens; my advice is to get the camera body only. Lenses make all the difference. A good lens is going to give you good pictures even on a 500$DSLR. But an average lens will give you average pictures even on 2000$ DSLR. If you are buying a DSLR and are thinking of using the kit lens for long, you won't be happy (if you have high standards).

2. Regarding the reviews, reviews will not elaborate on the type of lenses that were used. I usually read three main types of reviews. One - dxomark for sensor test. This is an excellent review site with a very scientific method of testing sensors. There is no subjective test. All accurate scientific data. This is the best site to see how the different camera sensors stack up.
b. For handling, body, features of the camera - I usually goto dprevw.
c. For lenses, I goto photozone.de. dxo mark also has lens tests but they have tested very few lenses so far.

To your original question, k-x is a really nice camera. If you check the sensor charts, it beats a lot of big names from Nikon and Canon. It even beats its bigger brother Pentax k-7 in many areas. K-x with a DA 40ltd, or DA 35 will be sufficiently sharp.
The things I don't like in k-x are - Autofocus, and viewfinder.

k-r will give you some more controls and a better AF. Image quality is the same as k-x (same sensor).

k-5 will give you the best possible APS-C sensor. Weather sealed body. And everything else. But it is outside your limit.

You can also look at Canon and Nikon. I don;t know the prices offhand, but there should be many good models available below 1000$.

If it were me (and I were not to get the k-5), I would get the k-x.

cheers

vegenigma · 12-08-2010, 09:52 PM

Thanks for all the help, everyone.Just bought a new K-r w/ 18-55 kit lens for $700 shipped ($620 after applying gift card balance) and a new Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for $360 shipped. Will probably hang onto the kit lens as a backup. I'm sure 'll post some shots in the near future.

In case anyone is wondering, the lens deal is at this link. They still have a few in stock if anyone here wants to pick one up for a decent price.

JeffJS · 12-08-2010, 10:52 PM

Shot the hell out of That grand, Didn't you? Good luck with the new camera.

paperbag846 · 12-09-2010, 12:43 AM

Hope the Tamron makes you happy

FHPhotographer · 12-09-2010, 12:46 AM

Welcome to the Forum.
First, don't let anybody tell you that what you had happen to your camera couldn't happen. There might have been operator error, but there might also have been problems with the body and/or the lens, or the combination. I've owned the 17-50 and the older Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and both are a quantum leap up from the Pentax 18-55s. For my money, the wide end of the 17-50 gave me more flexibility shooting indoors than the 28-75 although there's really nothing to pick between them for image quality. Good luck with the new setup and you got a great deal on the 17-50 because B&H is running about $40 higher after the manufacturer's $45 rebate,
EDIT: oops, looks like the price is the same if SimplyElectronics is keeping the rebate (?). In any case a good price on a good lens,
Brian

jolepp · 12-09-2010, 02:29 AM

Originally posted by JeffJS

Shot the hell out of That grand, Didn't you? Good luck with the new camera.

Ask not what the economy can do to your pocketbook ... ;-)

JeffJS · 12-09-2010, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by jolepp

Ask not what the economy can do to your pocketbook ... ;-)

12-09-2010, 12:46 AM	#28
FHPhotographer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Fountain Hills, AZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,297	Welcome to the Forum. First, don't let anybody tell you that what you had happen to your camera couldn't happen. There might have been operator error, but there might also have been problems with the body and/or the lens, or the combination. I've owned the 17-50 and the older Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and both are a quantum leap up from the Pentax 18-55s. For my money, the wide end of the 17-50 gave me more flexibility shooting indoors than the 28-75 although there's really nothing to pick between them for image quality. Good luck with the new setup and you got a great deal on the 17-50 because B&H is running about $40 higher after the manufacturer's $45 rebate, *EDIT: oops, looks like the price is the same if SimplyElectronics* is keeping the rebate (?). In any case a good price on a good lens,** Brian Last edited by FHPhotographer; 12-09-2010 at 12:59 AM. Reason: new pricing info

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
$10,000 Dream Lens Collection - What Would You Buy?	hangu	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	66	05-18-2010 04:57 PM
Should I be a good Pentax choirboy and buy a DA 15 Limited or buy the Sigma 10-20mm?	tokyoso	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	42	03-14-2010 04:54 PM
Canon 7D $3,000 to modify or $5,000 & it's done	Samsungian	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	1	02-20-2010 01:34 PM
only $38,000.00	wlank	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	3	01-30-2010 06:12 PM
SIGMA 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM Lens for PENTAX:To buy or not to buy?	thelittlecar	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	21	12-31-2009 06:01 AM

12-08-2010, 06:06 PM	#16
vegenigma New Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 22 Original Poster	EDIT: Bah, on second thought, I have no interest in arguing. Last edited by vegenigma; 12-08-2010 at 06:33 PM.

12-08-2010, 06:09 PM	#17
vegenigma New Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 22 Original Poster	I think I may have given some of you the wrong idea. While I do want a camera that is capable of capturing slowly-moving subjects in low light, I noticed a problem with the image sharpness of my K-x fairly quickly and then devoted the vast majority of my 1000 or so shots to testing it in decent lighting and with stationary subjects. The sharpness/focus problem I experienced occurred very consistently in even the easiest of shots, with the exception of those with subjects in very close proximity.

12-08-2010, 06:37 PM	#18
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by vegenigma The sharpness/focus problem I experienced occurred very consistently in even the easiest of shots, with the exception of those with subjects in very close proximity. Were you shooting those subjects with the lens wide open? The kit lens is not very sharp at it's widest aperture.

12-08-2010, 06:42 PM	#19
vegenigma New Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 22 Original Poster	Originally posted by paperbag846 J Buy a KX body only, and a Tameron 17-50 2.8, or the 28-70 2.8, which is supposed to be a brighter lens. They are good, fast, and only run you about 500, which is a very good deal for a fast lens. Welcome to the sinkhole that is lens buying... it's addictive! Thank you! Just to confirm, is this the one you're referencing? Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF] AF016P-700 B&H

12-08-2010, 06:44 PM	#20
vegenigma New Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 22 Original Poster	Originally posted by paperbag846 Were you shooting those subjects with the lens wide open? The kit lens is not very sharp at it's widest aperture. For the most part, yes. I'm beginning to think I just have standards that the K-x w/ kit lens doesn't live up to. With all the reviews I perused, I'm surprised I didn't read much about problems w/ sharpness deficiency at wide aperture.

12-08-2010, 06:44 PM	#21
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by vegenigma Thank you! Just to confirm, is this the one you're referencing? Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF] AF016P-700 B&H That would be the one.. Heed this.. Quote: Welcome to the sinkhole that is lens buying... it's addictive!

12-08-2010, 07:18 PM	#22
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Glad I could help. Take a look at the 28-70 as well... it is supposed to be a little better for low light situations, but it's not nearly as wide. It would be better for portraits though. Depends on what you want... really wide angles, or better portraits?

12-08-2010, 07:22 PM	#23
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by vegenigma With all the reviews I perused, I'm surprised I didn't read much about problems w/ sharpness deficiency at wide aperture. Well any lens is going to be it's softest wide open. With a 2.8 lens though, you can shoot at f4 and get a much sharper image than the kit at an equivalent aperture. I think most lens reviews are very realistic about the kit lens. It's not great... but it's great for $100.

12-08-2010, 08:09 PM	#24
dexmus Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: United States Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 392	Originally posted by vegenigma For the most part, yes. I'm beginning to think I just have standards that the K-x w/ kit lens doesn't live up to. With all the reviews I perused, I'm surprised I didn't read much about problems w/ sharpness deficiency at wide aperture. Couple of things here - 1. Kit lenses are usually not good. Some people say that they are good value for money. But, personally, I never use the kit lens; my advice is to get the camera body only. Lenses make all the difference. A good lens is going to give you good pictures even on a 500$DSLR. But an average lens will give you average pictures even on 2000$ DSLR. If you are buying a DSLR and are thinking of using the kit lens for long, you won't be happy (if you have high standards). 2. Regarding the reviews, reviews will not elaborate on the type of lenses that were used. I usually read three main types of reviews. One - dxomark for sensor test. This is an excellent review site with a very scientific method of testing sensors. There is no subjective test. All accurate scientific data. This is the best site to see how the different camera sensors stack up. b. For handling, body, features of the camera - I usually goto dprevw. c. For lenses, I goto photozone.de. dxo mark also has lens tests but they have tested very few lenses so far. To your original question, k-x is a really nice camera. If you check the sensor charts, it beats a lot of big names from Nikon and Canon. It even beats its bigger brother Pentax k-7 in many areas. K-x with a DA 40ltd, or DA 35 will be sufficiently sharp. The things I don't like in k-x are - Autofocus, and viewfinder. k-r will give you some more controls and a better AF. Image quality is the same as k-x (same sensor). k-5 will give you the best possible APS-C sensor. Weather sealed body. And everything else. But it is outside your limit. You can also look at Canon and Nikon. I don;t know the prices offhand, but there should be many good models available below 1000$. If it were me (and I were not to get the k-5), I would get the k-x. cheers

12-08-2010, 09:52 PM	#25
vegenigma New Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 22 Original Poster	Thanks for all the help, everyone.Just bought a new K-r w/ 18-55 kit lens for $700 shipped ($620 after applying gift card balance) and a new Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for $360 shipped. Will probably hang onto the kit lens as a backup. I'm sure 'll post some shots in the near future. In case anyone is wondering, the lens deal is at this link. They still have a few in stock if anyone here wants to pick one up for a decent price.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-08-2010, 10:52 PM	#26
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Shot the hell out of That grand, Didn't you? Good luck with the new camera.

12-09-2010, 12:43 AM	#27
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Hope the Tamron makes you happy

12-09-2010, 02:29 AM	#29
jolepp Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Finland Photos: Albums Posts: 3,196	Originally posted by JeffJS Shot the hell out of That grand, Didn't you? Good luck with the new camera. Ask not what the economy can do to your pocketbook ... ;-)

12-09-2010, 10:38 AM	#30
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by jolepp Ask not what the economy can do to your pocketbook ... ;-)